2. The judgment of unfair sentencing refers to the case where the sentence of the judgment of the court below is too heavy or too minor in light of the content of the specific case.

Based on the statutory penalty, the sentencing is a discretionary judgment that takes place within a reasonable and appropriate scope by comprehensively taking into account the conditions of the sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act based on the statutory penalty, and there is a unique area of the first instance court in our Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the direct principle.

In addition to these circumstances and the ex post facto nature of the appellate court, if there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(2) On July 23, 2015, the lower court rendered the above sentence to the Defendant in consideration of the following: (a) under favorable circumstances: (b) the Defendant reflects the crime; (c) the Defendant agreed with the victim of special intimidation; (d) the Defendant was a disabled person of Grade III with a mental disorder; (c) the Defendant re-offendered during the period of repeated crime; (d) the Defendant is not good to commit a crime of special intimidation; and (e) the Defendant has many records of criminal punishment as a crime of violence or obstruction of performance of official duties; and (e) the Defendant was sentenced to the above sentence in consideration of the circumstances at a disadvantage, such as the fact that there is no special circumstance or change of circumstances that may be considered for sentencing newly in the trial; and (e) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family relationship, motive and background of the crime; and (e) the circumstances after the crime, etc., all the sentencing factors indicated in the records and arguments of the instant case, the lower court’s sentencing is too excessive

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is without merit and it is in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.